The Science of Cosmology:

Letting the air out of the Big Bang

A report by:

FComm. D.L. Wey

DCOSR: SFS-SFC

For a time the science of cosmology has asserted the theory of the 'Big Bang, and[for a time]it appeared the COBE[Cosmic Background Explorer] was to be the quintessential provider of its validity. However, questions soon arose with concerns over the existence of 'dark matter',and the definitive age of the universe. Continuous 'redefinition of the measurements used to determine the Hubble Constant' [representing the rate of expansion of the universe] have established a 'new' value of roughly nine to twelve billion years.

While this value is considerably lower than previous estimations of between twelve and fifteen billion] it was consistent with the ages of the oldest known stellar bodies. However, recent observations have detected 'mature' galaxies located in the 'Early' Universe.

Finding objects that factor out at an age greater than that of the universe as a whole creates an inconsistency cosmologists refer to as 'The Age Problem.'And while the COBE results are consistent with the theory of inflation, they are not 'proof' of it!

For in order for the 'inflation' theory to work, it requires the universe to be much denser' than it appears. Put simply, more matter means a younger universe. Cosmologists have attempted to reconcile this 'discrepancy' with the existence of 'Cold Dark Matter', as well as introducing the cosmological constant [represented by the Greek letter Lambda] which 'assumes' the existence of an energy inherent in the fabric of space. Yet, thus far in the twentieth century, neither of these had ever been determined to exist, nor had either ever been found. However, the 'cosmological constant' has created problems of its own for the field of cosmology, as well as physics.

For the models of the 'Big Bang' now currently in use, suggest a value for lambda very close to zero. However, current assessments made by the particle physics community predict a cosmological constant greater by a factor as much as 1052 [a figure large enough to have crushed the universe back down to nothing right after the 'Big Bang']. Which leaves the question of whether the science of cosmology hasn't caused more problems for itself than it has solved. For as with other scientific disciplines, they often created more questions for themselves then they answer.